I agree with Felts, the background is certainly a aesthetic choice and certainly can be no reason for a rejection. And I do this it is a nice touch as well. I have no idea why this would be rejected. The animation is smooth, camerawork is great, everything is great in my opinion. Great work!

I really like your project, too, and I don’t understand why it was rejected. And I think the background looks nice. But there is one thing that I don’t like in it. The cuts seem too abrupt, in my opinion. In some places they change even if the camera positions are very similar, causing glitches or something like that. Also, the camera movement is imperfect. I know how crappy can AE camera be… But I really don’t think that would be the reason to hard-reject this. Try to contact support, maybe they can help you

I sent a message to the support before opening this thread
Thank you MRMdesigns for the criticism of camera movement, I will improve it as well.

The hard rejection was a electrochoc for me because everything was put in doubt. I had no idea of what I could do. I’m really glad that you don’t see a big problem with my job!I will improve the background, the camera movement and try to make the file more “user friendly”.I do not insist with thanks, otherwise you will ask me a percentage. When it will be a blockbuster Thank you guys, I love you

There’s no law that says a camera move must be cushioned or that jump-cuts are outlawed.

These are very viable aesthetic devices. I don’t think that either is handled masterfully here, but I don’t think they’re handled especially badly either – and on the other hand I do think that there’s a lot to like about how the movement is handled.

The main point is, that if the cause of the hard rejection were any of the above, then a short sentence explaining that is required. I can understand a reviewer falling back on a generic “quality not enough” for a project that’s below par across the board, but that’s not the case here.

PS.. my major criticism of the file is over-use of the “swing” effect. I think for an animation that ostensibly occurs on a 2D plane in a 3D space, that this swing is conceptually incongruous and aesthetically superfluous. The file might show more confidence and aesthetic integrity if you were to use a 2D transition or none at all.

I think this is one area where experience really shines through – knowing when to do nothing!

I could also characterise your jump cutting as fear of stillness, rather than a positive conceptual element, but we’re getting all analytical now.

Wow.. It’s ridiculous to see what gets hard rejected and what you get to see accepted sometimes, i really think this has something to with the opinions of certain reviewers, where the one is accepting way easier and way simpler files the other one strives to accept more polished and original work.

Anyway, i loved the file, even think it would sell pretty good. I am also not a fan of some of the fast cuts of camera moves but like Felt mentioned its something you choose to do, where i don’t like it others love it. The only reason why a file like this should be rejected is if the template is so badly organized and structured that it is almost impossible for new after effects users to easily edit the template. But still, this should be mentioned by the reviewer and a soft rejection should occur. I hope you get your file through, really wonder how it will sell.

Post Reply

<strong></strong> to make things bold
<em></em> to emphasize
<ul><li> or <ol><li> to make lists
<h3> or <h4> to make headings
<pre></pre> for code blocks
<code></code> for a few words of code
<a></a> for links
<img> to paste in an image (it'll need to be hosted somewhere else though)
<blockquote></blockquote> to quote somebody